Films

We run a documentary film company called Two Raven Films., specialising in political and current affairs topics.

Our latest documentary is Sweden, Dying to be Multicultural. The excellent news is that we have sold the documentary to the world’s second largest streaming service and Netflix’s chief competitor, Amazon Prime, so it can now be seen for free by 80 million American subscribers on their television sets and tablets. Sharing space with the latest Hollywood films and documentaries made with budgets far exceeding ours, we are rather pleased. The backing from Amazon – who stand as co-producers – gives us enormous prestige and credibility and the deal is non-exclusive in Europe at least, allowing us to reach out to TV companies here. My book on Swedish immigration policy is being updated and will be linked to the documentary. For those of you who have an Amazon Prime subscription – well worth it, and there are several deals available for new members – it can be viewed for free here on Amazon Prime

Otherwise there is a pay-and-play version available on the documentary maker’s website Vimeo (a sort of posh YouTube), here. It is around $4.

Amazon Prime: huge achievement

It is based on my book Sweden, Dying to be Multicultural , a political and sociological look at events in Sweden of the past few years. It looks at the globalist mindset of the Swedish elites and how it challenges the traditional, nation-centred values that made Sweden one of the most successful societies in the late twentieth century.

Synopsis

The immigration that Sweden is experiencing is not paying for itself, and has the potential to transform Sweden quite dramatically. There is a mismatch in that those who are most enthusiastic about immigration – the upper middle classes – are the least threatened by its negative consequences in the short term, since they are insulated by their incomes and jobs from having to rub shoulders with migrants in the way the working classes are forced to do.

I visited the town where I grew up, Malmo, which is becoming more and more of a tax burden on the rest of Sweden the more multicultural it gets, thus contradicting the blithely confident prediction that migration, apart from all its “positive cultural sides”, was a boon to the economy. The school results are tanking, the Jews have left the city (due to Muslim antisemitism), and the murder rate, at least for 2017 so far, is as high as Chicago’s.

At the city’s university, where multiculturalism is a watchword, professors complain of a climate of censorship. No one may deviate from the government line that immigration is a good thing. As a result, so many important and entirely justified questions are not being asked. Do Swedes not have a right to their own country? Is this experiment affordable?

Malmo was once prosperous but is now one of the poorest cities in Sweden. Only one in four former refugee migrants is in a full-time job after eight years. Sweden can afford to bail Malmo out, but who is going to bail Sweden out if its migration pattern and employment patterns come to approximate to Malmo’s today? Sweden’s four poorest towns – of which Malmo is the largest – are the four towns with the highest migrant populations. In a sense, Malmo is the canary in the coal mine. The Swedish elite has enforced a mass migration consensus. But the necessary complement – successful integration – has been a failure.

In this documentary I return home, take the pulse of the city and talk to people – locals, bus drivers, and academics, many of whom complain about the hostile intellectual climate in Sweden as the ideology of mass immigration is forced upon the populace. The nation state for most people is still the main guarantor of living standards, security and law and order, and the left’s project to guarantee approximate equality can only currently be realised within the borders of a nation state. Most people feel concentric circles of loyalty working outwards from their families to take in larger communities and finally the nation state.

They do not share the elites’ values of global cosmopolitanism. They cannot understand why their elites – journalists, civil servants, politicians – are tampering with the old social contract, based on hard work, homogeneous protestant values and respect for the process of give and take between generations and strangers sharing the same origins that once bound Swedes together and made them one of the most successful nations in history for this untried experiment in segregated multiculturalism; especially when history shows us so many examples of multicultural societies that have exploded in conflict.

Normal Swedes don’t understand why Sweden alone has to have these heavy obligations to the world’s poor, when the price seems to be the dissolution of their own Swedish identity while the Muslims especially, far from weakening theirs, seek to retain or even advance their identities.

Is Sweden still going to be Sweden in thirty years’ time. Are the Swedes still going to be able to have a country to call their own? And what is the point? The world’s population increases by the equivalent of one Sweden every two weeks. Saving the world this way – through a policy of open borders – is like scooping out the ocean with a spoon. The Arabs will still have their identity and own countries in a generation’s time. But Swedes may not.

Given that the migrants come from the most unstable and unsuccessful regions of the world, is the world’s most successful society going to continue to be successful? Who can guarantee that this social experiment is going to work? And who took it upon themselves to make this decision? And why are they not being held to account?